Michael Rasmussen?

[mountainrman]

I did not realise this place existed as a mine of information at the time the Rasmussen thing kicked off.

Assembling a few obvious truths:

He appears to be a victim of the "blacklist", the saxobank thing leaves question marks. also, I am sure a victim of "payback" from those in Danish cycling federation who he clearly had a history with, and they in turn appeared to want to "settle a score"

He also said "the team knew where he was" even if he had not told UCI, on which basis he won court cases - now appealing for more. It seemed outrageous at the time, a rider being pulled out whilst leading other than for testing negative.

I have read very mixed views, from peloton riders supporting him, saying he was clean. One explanation I heard of the whereabouts row was it involved "other women"! I also heard at least some alleged connection to some doping network.

If nothing else it contrasts differences in federations, in which he appeared to be liable to far more testing than (say) a spanish rider. He says his greatest regret is not taking up mexican nationality, which would have obviated the need to do TWO sets of testing, UCI and Danish, accounting for a lot of tests.

So my question is, from those in the know was Rasmussen
Victim? Clean? Doper? What is the low down on him?

 

[Pantani_lives]

My opinion about Rasmussen is that he was a doper, but that he was treated worse than other dopers, like a kind of skapegoat. Or maybe he had the bad luck to be caught at the wrong time.

 

[DominicDecoco]

No question about it. Massive doper.

 

[pelodee]

I haven't read it myself, but look for some reviews of this book:

The Scapegoat by Verner Møller

...or some articles by him / interviews with him.

 

[MrRoboto]

There is no doubt he doped. He even basically admitted it recently when commenting on the Armstrong case.

 

[mountainrman]

There is no doubt he doped. He even basically admitted it recently when commenting on the Armstrong case.

Can you point me to a link somewhere? I missed that.

 

[Cookster15]

My recollection of Michael Rasmussen was that he became a King of the Mountain specialist - usually targeting a Pyrenean stage with multiple climbs and a downhill finish that would not be contested by the GC favourites. Then in 2007 - BAM - he suddenly looked the real deal for yellow!

Thankfully his team could see the writing on the wall about his questionable pre tour game of hide and seek and pulled him from the race before Rabobank pulled their sponsorship. No doubt a doper and an unrepentant doper at that.

Sure there will be those in this forum who think everyone doped the same so he was harshly done by. But I think USADA has buried the myth of a level playing field in Amstrong's case ie; "the most sophisticated organised doping conspiracy uncovered in sporting history".

 

[mountainrman]

The reason I raise this now, is that I wonder whether Rabobank think the team will get hammered in the courts for what was unjustified action on Rasmussen - and as a TdF winner potentially, the "loss" if not warranted must run to 7 or even 8 figures.

ie -Their lawyers warning them about the potential for the team having to pay out a massive sum to Rasmussen.

Probably not the determing factor, but certainly could be a straw that broke the back - when they carry out an investment "risk assessment", and part of the reason they quit.

 

["Jeff"]

doper ?

Just watch Rasmussen & Contador on the last 2-3 kilometres of the Peyresourde in the Tour of 2007.

There you have your answer.

 

[neineinei]

The reason I raise this now, is that I wonder whether Rabobank think the team will get hammered in the courts for what was unjustified action on Rasmussen - and as a TdF winner potentially, the "loss" if not warranted must run to 7 or even 8 figures.

ie -Their lawyers warning them about the potential for the team having to pay out a massive sum to Rasmussen.

Probably not the determing factor, but certainly could be a straw that broke the back - when they carry out an investment "risk assessment", and part of the reason they quit.

Rabobank wants to remove themselves from the fact that the cycling team knew Rasmussen was doping, that the team and the doctors provided dope and assisted with doping. There is no way in hell Rasmussen was clean. His name is popping up in most major doping investigation, all over the map.

 

[veganrob]

Doper. Does not belong in cycling at any level.

 

[Cookster15]

Rabobank wants to remove themselves from the fact that the cycling team knew Rasmussen was doping, that the team and the doctors provided dope and assisted with doping. There is no way in hell Rasmussen was clean. His name is popping up in most major doping investigation, all over the map.

Yep. This is why his team pulled him from the 2007 Tour before Rabobank pulled their sponsorship. Maybe in some way he was a scapegoat for unscrupulous behavior elsewhere in his team but there is little doubt in my mind he was a heavy doper - at least in 2007 and deserved what happened back then. He had a choice to stay a KOM specialist but got greedy for the GC spoils.

 

[mountainrman]

Rabobank wants to remove themselves from the fact that the cycling team knew Rasmussen was doping, that the team and the doctors provided dope and assisted with doping. There is no way in hell Rasmussen was clean. His name is popping up in most major doping investigation, all over the map.

Sorry - which of the investigations? the big ones? Fuentes or Ferrari?

As for that last climb - One differnce between Rasmussen and Contador, is that Rasmussen could only do it on the mountains and is as light as a feather.
He expected to lose a couple of minutes on the TT because of his build and specialization. Contador on the other hand TTd as well as he climbed - and that is a bigger red flag.
I have actually heard other riders speak up for Rasmu on doping - which is unusual. Omerta being what it is.

 

[Ney the Viking]

I put this in the Reactions thread but i think it bears repeating here:

There is a bit more on extrabladet. http://translate.google.com/translat...cle1846417.ece

In fact if that is not a defacto admission of being doped to the gills himself i dont know what is. He says that you have to be extremely naive to believe cycling was clean when he raced, and the only thing that should surprise was the extent of the US Postal programme. So yeah seems like the chicken just doesa big *rolleyes* at the fact that it took so long for the danish journalists to clue in on the doping. He doesnt seem to regret a thing however. So he is definitly part of the new Omerta, shrug at the past laugh at the idiotic journalists and then buisness as usual. Sometimes i am ashamed at my fellow countrymen

 

[VO2 Max]

Rabobank wants to remove themselves from the fact that the cycling team knew Rasmussen was doping, that the team and the doctors provided dope and assisted with doping. There is no way in hell Rasmussen was clean. His name is popping up in most major doping investigation, all over the map.

This is exactly the point. There's no doubt at all that Rasmussen was a doper, but his team was also seemingly completely complicit in this. They sacked him on the verge of winning the Tour even though they always knew what he was doing and there was no sanctionable case from the ASO/UCI; from his pov it's insane. Of course it was right that he didn't win the Tour but the whole case is a pretty good demonstration of how screwed up pro cycling is.

 

[Caruut]

There was also the issue of him getting a team-mate to run drugs for him back when he was in MTB. He was obviously doping, but got treated pretty badly compared to others in the same position. I guess it's much easier to beat up on a pale, skinny weirdo than a fan favourite.

 

[ProfTournesol]

My opinion about Rasmussen is that he was a doper, but that he was treated worse than other dopers, like a kind of skapegoat. Or maybe he had the bad luck to be caught at the wrong time.

Very likely a doper who also had the misfortune to be unlikeable.

 

[DominicDecoco]

Very likely a doper who also had the misfortune to be unlikeable.

He might be a doper. But unlikeable is the least he is.

 

[Caruut]

He might be a doper. But unlikeable is the least he is. That's for sure.

I actually prefer the lone wolf dopers like him to the pushers that we see elsewhere. It's hard to deny, however, that he does not exactly fit any of the media darling templates very well.

Let's go through a few;

- Ideal son-in-law: good haircut, stable life, likeable but not interesting
- Loveable playboy: boyish good looks, sleeps around but jokes in interviews so that's okay
- Against all-odds hero: rises from humble beginnings to conquer
- Clown: willing to say something stupid once in a while in exchange for good copy
- Male pin-up: strong jaw, winning smile, a lot of success and a knack for keeping his private life hidden
- Outspoken maverick: says what's on his mind without minding what he says

I would have said that Andy Schleck, Cipo, Lance, Voigt, Boonen and Cav fit (or fitted) these media stereotypes of how a champion "should" behave. Chicken was just an eerily pale and skinny loner in their eyes.

 

[mountainrman]

I actually prefer the lone wolf dopers like him to the pushers that we see elsewhere. It's hard to deny, however, that he does not exactly fit any of the media darling templates very well.

Let's go through a few;

- Ideal son-in-law: good haircut, stable life, likeable but not interesting
- Loveable playboy: boyish good looks, sleeps around but jokes in interviews so that's okay
- Against all-odds hero: rises from humble beginnings to conquer
- Clown: willing to say something stupid once in a while in exchange for good copy
- Male pin-up: strong jaw, winning smile, a lot of success and a knack for keeping his private life hidden
- Outspoken maverick: says what's on his mind without minding what he says

I would have said that Andy Schleck, Cipo, Lance, Voigt, Boonen and Cav fit (or fitted) these media stereotypes of how a champion "should" behave. Chicken was just an eerily pale and skinny loner in their eyes.

Many top athletes are just like that. I know a lot of high names from athletics.
The "media" image is crafted.

I actually think thats part of why Armstrong survived so long - he has charisma, where many of his detractors have had a charisma bypass operations.

 

[Fidolix]

Many top athletes are just like that. I know a lot of high names from athletics.
The "media" image is crafted.

I actually think thats part of why Armstrong survived so long - he has charisma, where many of his detractors have had a charisma bypass operations.

Psycopath´s usually have charisma, charm and are well spoken, the others don´t have these features to the same degree, certainly not Rasmussen.

But yes, he was surely a doper as well.